Vtfeq 




z 




LIBRARY OF CONGRESS 



019 



944 318 5 *> 



Hollinger Corp. 
pH8.5 



Z$ 




£ 









/^-^-z 7 

^,/e 



ANNEXATION OF HAWAII. 



SPEECH 



OF 



HON. JOHN A. BARHAM, 

OF CALIFORNIA, 



IN THE 



HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, 



Tuesday, June 14, 1803. 



► • -♦— • • 



1898. 






/.- 



T 

*• 



^ 




72JC3 



\ 



.83 



SPEECH 



OP 



HON. JOHN A. BARHAM. 



The House having under consideration the joint resolution (H. Res. 259) to 
provide for annexing the Hawaiian Islands to the United States- 
Mr. BARHAM said: 

Mr. Speaker: It is not my purpose to enter at length upon the 
discussion of the resolutions now under consideration; nor do I 
hope or expect to advance any new ideas upon the argument of a 
question which has so thoroughly met consideration through the 
public press by the Secretaries of Agriculture, War, and Navy, 
and in reports by committees to Congress. 

I have long favored the annexation of Hawaii from a commer- 
cial and military point of view. These islands, in my opinion, 
should become a part of the territory of the United States. 

The first proposition which I desire to call to the attention of 
the House is the first point which was made by the gentleman 
from Arkansas [Mr. Dinsmore], and that is as to the constitu- 
tionality of the resolutions. It seems singular to me, Mr. Speaker, 
that at this day and age it should be necessary to discuss ques- 
tions of this kind, for the action proposed in the resolutions has 
long been settled to be constitutional, not only by legislative con- 
struction, but by judicial construction and by the voice of the 
people, pronounced in every possible way. 

There are a number of provisions of the Constitution under, 
which the power to pass these resolutions may be found. First, 
there is the power to promote the general welfare and the com- 
mon defense of the country. It has been repeatedly declared 
upon the floor of this House by members that in their opinion 
these islands are necessary for the common defense of this coun- 
try. If there was no other provision in the Constitution, that of 

itself would warrant this character of procedure. 

3184 ft 



4 

Now, take the general- welfare clause. Under that these reso- 
lutions may he passed by Congress and be within the provisions 
of our Constitution. Those of us who believe that it is for the 
best interest and general welfare of the country to annex the 
islands, believe so from commercial, military, and other reasons. 
So far as I am concerned, I believe these islands are of great mil- 
itary and commercial importance, therefore coming under two 
rules, the general welfare and common defense of the country. 
But, Mr. Speaker, there is another provision of the Constitution 
under which these resolutions are also constitutional and within 
the power of Congress to adopt — under that provision which de- 
clares that Congress shall have power to admit a State. Now, 
it is an elementary principle of law as old as civilization itself, it 
is concurrent with the birth of jurisprudence itself, that the 
"greater contains the less." It is conceded on all sides that the 
Congress of the United States has the power to admit a State. 
Now, taking the elementary principle conceded by everybody, 
that the "greater contains the less," Congress has of necessity 
the right and power to annex a Territory. And that is not with- 
out judicial construction. 

Now, what is a State? A State, in a strict construction of the 
word, means a political body, an independent sovereignty. Un- 
der that definition there is no such a thing as a State in the Amer- 
ican Union, nor is there such a thing under that definition either 
as to the General Government, the National Government, because 
the States have only the power which has been reserved to them, 
and such incidental power as is necessary to carry out the re- 
served power. The General Government only has the power 
which has been granted by the States, with the incidental power 
necessary to carry out the granted power. 

Now, early in the history of the country the question arose in a 
suit by the District of Columbia as to whether it had the power 
to sue, to bring action. Unless it was a State it could not bring 
an action, The Supreme Court of the United States held that in 
the broader and primary sense of the word " State " that the Dis- 
trict of Columbia is a State. Well, anybody knows that it is not 
a State in the ordinary acceptation of the term as used in America. 
It never had any representation by Senators. It did at one time 
have representation upon the floor of this House. 

3i84 



Again this question arose under the revenue laws of this coun- 
try, where the revenue laws provided for the manner of collecting 
the revenues— the internal revenues— among the States. The Su- 
preme Court of the United States found no difficulty in holding 
that a Territory is a State within the meaning of that act. And, 
again, in the Dred Scott case it necessarily followed from the 
decision which was rendered in that case that a Territory was a 
State. Dred Scott, his wife, and two babies were slaves. They 
were taken from the State of Missouri into Illinois, and from Illi- 
nois to Fort Snelling, which was west of the Mississippi River. 
That was then a part of the territory of the United States. The 
point, of necessity, arose as to whether the Territory was a State. 

Now, I want to read, right in connection with this, just exactly 
what the Supreme Court said in the Dred Scott case, commencing 
where the gentleman from Askansas [Mr. Dinsmore] left off by 
the remark that the opinion following what he had read wa3 
obiter dictum. I think, ho vvever , that the gentiem an from Arkan- 
sas is the last man in America who should raise any question about 
what was settled in the Dred Scott case. 

Before I read that, however, I want to call attention of the 
House to a point that was submitted. He based his argument on 
the declaration of Mr. Madison as to the unconstitutionality of 
the admission of the territory known as the Northwest Territory, 
that which was granted to the Confederation by Virginia before 
the Constitution was adopted and during the Federation. Mr. 
Madison thought that that was beyond the power of the Confed- 
erated States, and probably it was. The Confederated States 
really had no Congress. They were only kind of ministers or am- 
bassadors to Congress with limited power. But this great North- 
western Territory was admitted by the Congress of the Confeder- 
ated States. 

Now, if Mr. Madison meant that the Congress of the United 
States which was to come after the adoption of the Constitution 
should have no such power, he certainly misconstrued the provision 
of the Constitution. For the fact is that immediately following the 
adoption of the Constitution on the 2d of April, 1790, the Con- 
gress of the United States accepted just such a cession from the 
State of North Carolina. The State of North Carolina held a cer- 



6 

tain territory, and deeded it to the United States, and by an act 
of Congress, which you will find in the first statutes of the Con- 
gress of the United States, the Congress of the United States — not 
the treaty-making power, but the Congress of the United States — 
accepted that cession, and out of that cession was formed the 
State of Tennessee. 

Now, if the Congress of the United States did not have the 
power to accept the cession and to annex the territory to the United 
States because before that it had been the territory of North Car- 
olina, and could take it from any other government as well as 
North Carolina, certainly, then, the State of Tennessee has never 
been in the Union and her Representatives upon the floor of this 
House are trespassers and usurpers. And again, following that, 
immediately upon the heels of this action was an act of Congress 
upon the cession made by Georgia. 

Georgia had not ceded to the Confederated States the territory 
which she claimed, and out of that territory was carved and made 
the State of Alabama. The Congress of the United States, as 
everybody knows, admitted the Republic of Texas under a resolu- 
tion to annex the Republic of Texas. That is the language of the 
resolution. That is the title of the resolution— a resolution "to 
annex the Territory of Texas." 

Mr. DINSMORE. Will the gentleman allow me an interruption? 

Mr. BARHAM. Yes. 

Mr. DINSMORE. I want to call the gentleman's attention to 
the fact that while that was the original title, it was changed be- 
fore the passage of the resolution. 

Mr. BARHAM. It was changed in the act admitting the State 
into the Union, not in the resolution for annexation. Now, I 
want the gentleman from Arkansas to give his attention to what 
he failed to read in the Dred Scott case. 

This Dred Scott case came up and was determined by the Su- 
preme Court of the United States after the admission of the ter- 
ritory ceded by North Carolina, after the annexation to the United 
States of' the territory ceded by Georgia, after the Republic of 
Texas was made a State of the Union, after the acquisition of the 
Louisiana purchase, after the California purchase, and after 
Arizona and New Mexico and the Gadsden purchase; with all 

3i84 



these facts of history before the Supreme Court of the United 
States, and the question, in my opinion, being squarely and prop- 
erly before the court whether a Territory is a State or not— be- 
cause if Dred Scott and his family had been taken without the 
jurisdiction of the United States, they were free and no longer 
slaves— the court rendered that decision. 

Now, what does the Supreme Court say, following the declara- 
tion of Mr. Madison, at which point the gentleman from Arkansas 
ceased to read? This is what the court, by Chief Justice Taney, 
said; and Justice Swayne, following, said that the court discussed 
no question which was not involved in the determination of the 
case, which the gentleman from Arkansas forgot also to read. 
The court says: 

We do not mean, however, to question the power of Congress in this re- 
spect. The power to expand the territory of the United States by the ad- 
mission of new States is plainly given, and in the construction of this power 
by all the departments of the Government it has been held to authorize the 
acquisition of territory, not fit for admission at the time, but to be admitted 
as soon as its population and situation would entitle it to admission. It is 
acquired to become a State, and not to be held as a colony and governed by 
Congress with absolute authority; and as the propriety of admitting a new 
State is committed to the sound discretion of Congress, the power to acquire 
territory for that purpose, to be held by the United States until it is in a 
suitable condition to become a State upon an equal footing with the other 
States, must rest upon the same discretion. 

It is a question for the political department of the Government and not 
the judicial; and whatever the political department of the Government shall 
recognize as within the limits of the United States, the judicial department 
is also bound to recognize, and to administer in it the laws of the United 
States, so far as they apply, and to maintain in the territory the authority 
and rights of the Government, and also the personal rights and rights of 
property of individual citizens, as secured by the Constitution. 

Now, Mr. Speaker, if there ever was a direct, positive declara- 
tion of the supreme tribunal of the United States upon any prop- 
osition, it is shown in that declaration, and I would not now take 
up the time of the House in discussing this question but for the 
fact that I do not desire, nor do I think it proper, that the state- 
ment of the gentleman from Arkansas [Mr. Dixsm ore] should go 
unchallenged on the floor of the House, except by the statement 
that the question had heretofore been settled. 

In my opinion, Mr. Speaker, these islands are of very great 
commercial importance. Our trade in the year 1897 reached 
$18,500,000, or over $53 for every inhabitant upon the islands. 
Our whole trade with Uruguay, Peru, Turkey, Portugal, and 

3481 



Greece reaches less than $15,000,000. The whole trade with Chile, 
Sweden, and Norway is not as great as it is with Hawaii. Our 
trade with Russia and the three Guianas combined does not equal 
our trade with the islands. It is greater than our total trade with 
Central America, or with Spain, Argentine, Switzerland, Vene- 
zuela, or Austria, and is equal to our combined trade with Den- 
mark and Colombia. 

It is perfectly apparent to my mind that the island can not 
maintain an independent responsible government. A protectorate 
over the islands would make this Government liable for the errors 
of that, without corresponding benefits. So that it seems to me 
that the question resolves itself into annexation or to quietly sitting 
by and see England, Japan, Germany, or some other nation take 
the islands and their trade and military advantages. I think we 
can not too highly estimate Hawaii from a commercial view, and 
unless we propose to bottle up and Chinaize this nation, we should 
not longer hesitate about annexation. 

The islands are of great importance from a military point of 
view. The strategic importance of Hawaii has been demon- 
strated by facts developed during the pending war with Spain. 
In order to reach a correct conclusion upon any subject it seems to 
me that we must seek light from persons, treaties, or commentaries 
of recognized ability and standing devoted to such subject. If I 
am sick, I take treatment from doctors learned in medicine. In 
attempting to work a correct solution of a legal question, the 
views of writers learned in the law and the opinion of courts of 
recognized standing and ability are consulted and almost univer- 
sally followed. So it seems to me, in military and naval affairs, 
that we should be largely guided by the opinions of men learned 
and trained upon these subjects. 

It is no argument to say that the officers in the Army and Navy 
can not be relied upon because of their desire for larger acquisi- 
tions so as to extend the Army and Navy. They are not subject 
to this character of criticism. They have just as much interest in 
the honor, integrity, and perpetuity of this nation as any other of 
our fellow-citizens, and they are just as loyal and patriotic and 
brave. It is not argument to say that the opinion of men learned 

and trained in military and naval affairs are biased and not hon- 

3iS4 



9 

est. I think they are just as loyal and true to the best interest of 
this Government as I am or anyone else in official life. The judg- 
ment of our military and naval officers upon the strategic impor- 
tance of Hawaii are practically unanimous. 

I desire to read a portion of the letter of General Schofield, 
dated January 12, 1898, as follows: 

From the time, twenty-five years ago, when I made a personal examina- 
tion for the purpose of ascertaining the value of those islands to this country 
for military and naval purposes I have always regarded ultimate annexation 
of the islands to this country as a public necessity. But the time when this 
should be accomplished had to depend on natural political development. In 
the meantime our national interests should be secured by the exclusive right 
to occupy, improve, and fortify Peaid River Harbor, so as to insure our pos- 
session of that harbor in time of war. 

To illustrate my views on this subject, I have likened that harbor to a 
commanding position in front of a defensive line which an army in the field 
is compelled to occupy. The army must occupy that advanced position and 
hold it at whatever cost, or else the enemy will occupy it with his artillery » 
and thus dominate the main line. If we do not occupy and fortify Pearl 
River Harbor, our enemy will occupy it as a base from which to conduct 
operations against our Pacific coast and the Isthmean Canal, which must, of 
course, in due time be constructed and controlled by this country. The 
position of such a base at a convenient distance from our Pacific coast would 
be a great temptation to an unfriendly nation to undertake hostile opera- 
tions against us. 

One of the greatest advantages of Pearl River Harbor to us consists in the 
fact that no navy would be required to defend it. 

These views he again expressed before the House Committee on 
Foreign Affairs a few days before the pending resolutions were 
reported. 

I am in accord with these views. In addition to this, I am 
satisfied that the Commander in Chief of our Armies, the Presi- 
dent of the United States, and his Secretaries of War and Navy, 
are convinced of the strategic importance of these islands. They 
proclaim their military importance. If Congress were not in ses- 
sion, no doubt they would forcibly seize the islands as a military 
necessity. 

While these islands can be peacefully accepted by the passage 
of these resolutions, why should Congress adjourn and compel the 
President, in order to prosecute the war as he thinks it should be, 
to forcibly seize the islands? So far as I am concerned, I am will- 
ing to remain, and hope Congress will continue in session until 
these resolutions are adopted, if it takes all summer. 

The annexation of Hawaii presents no " entangling alliances." 

At this point Jefferson's ' ' entangling alliances " are relied upon 
3484 



10 

by the opposition as a warning, carrying with it sufficient force 
to frighten us out of the idea of further extension of territory. 
Did Jefferson mean by ''entangling alliances" that the United 
States should not acquire or extend its territorial limits? If he 
did mean that, he most certainly forgot to retract it when the 
United States made the Louisiana purchase. 

Should we accept the proposition recently made by Hon. Joseph 
Chamberlain, secretary of state for the English colonies, this 
would be an alliance with England. Whether it would prove an 
"entangling alliance " is a question I will not now pursue. With 
whom did we ally ourselves when we acquired Louisiana and 
Texas and California? With whom will we ally ourselves when 
the Stars and Stripes wave over Hawaii? If we adopt these reso- 
lutions, will we necessarily accept Mr. Chamberlain's Anglo- 
American alliance? I think not. It will only be doing that which 
should long since have been done and which the war with Spain 
so fully demonstrates we must do, or sacrifice the unparalleled 
achievement of our arms upon the seas, so heroically won by 
Admiral Dewey and his men at Manila, and endanger him, his men, 
and our soldiers who so recently left the port of San Francisco 
to aid in holding the fruits of that victory. 

When the United States shalltake such outlying necessary 
posts of military defense, and provide herself with a sufficient 
navy to command the respect of the world, then, and not until 
then, will we be secured in peace. Let American battle ships plow 
the furrows through the Atlantic and Pacific, in which shall fol- 
low the white wings of American commerce in a peaceful strug- 
gle for commercial advantage. 

But a great discovery has been made very recently at Unalaska 
by the opponents of this measure. It is argued the segment of 
the circle of the earth's surface drawn from San Francisco to the 
Orient, which passes far to the north of Hawaii, bends more 
closely to the Aleutian Islands than the Sandwich groups, furnish- 
ing the shortest track for vessels, and a coaling station at Una- 
laska. I prefer to rest my conclusion upon the opinion of men 
trained and learned in this direction, and content myself with the 
evidence of Commodore Melville upon this subject. He says: 
*' The point has been made in this debate that there is no advan- 
tage in having Honolulu as a port of call on the way to Yokohama 



o 



11 

and Hongkong, inasmuch as Unalaska, which is already in onr 
own territory, is on the shortest route to the Orient, and there- 
fore we now have a port without annexing any other terri- 
tory." 

This statement is one of those specious half truths which are 
often worse than absolute errors in deceiving persons who have 
not possession of all the facts, and I shall now proceed to show 
that for the purposes of commerce this raising the question of 
Unalaska is a mere farce. 

I shall discuss in a few moments the question of the difference 
in distance from San Francisco to Yokohama via Honolulu and 
via Unalaska, but I shall first call attention to the fact that a 
less desirable port of call than Unalaska would be hard to find. 
It is situated above the fiftieth parallel of north latitude, and has 
practically nothing but a harbor to recommend it. There is no 
trade or commerce, no repair shops; in fact, nothing whatever to 
attract a great mail steamer proceeding from the metropolis of 
our Pacific coast to the gateway of the Orient at Yokohama.. 

Anyone at all familiar is aware that one of the greatest dan- 
gers to navigation is fog, and the sea about Unalaska is one of 
the foggiest regions in the whole world. Probably nearly every- 
body present has enjoyed reading the poems of Rudyard Kip- 
ling known as The Seven Seas, which include a short one called 
"The rhyme of the seven sealers," and he there depicts in the 
most graphic style the density of the fog whichis found in the 
neighborhood of this port which my friends have advertised as 
so desirable as a port of call. Of course I have not rested content 
with Mr. Kipling's poem alone, but have taken pains to verify 
the statements there made by inquiring of naval officers and 
others who have spent considerable time near the Aleutian group, 
and they have told me that Mr. Kipling's picture is not over- 
drawn at ail. 

There are times, however, in the winter when there is clear 
weather, but then this most attractive port is closed by the ice, 
for, in spite of the Japan current, which corresponds with the 
Gulf Stream in the Atlantic, the region around Unalaska is 
blocked with floe ice. There are, of course, openings in this ice, 
and vessels that make a business of arctic cruising might utilize 
them; but it can be readily appreciated that the fine passenger 

3484 



12 

and freight steamers sailing from San Francisco are not going to 
run this risk. 

Now, let us compare with this region of ice and fog the earthly- 
paradise which Hawaii will furnish us. Here there is never a fog, 
and perpetual summer makes ice a luxury of manufacture. Situ- 
ated in the belt of the northeast trades, the climate is almost per- 
fect, and navigation is rarely troubled with a storm. Honolulu 
itself is practically an American city planted in these isles of the 
Pacific, with all the modern features of civilized life, and already 
a port of call for several steamship lines. The industries of the 
island group have built up machine shops that are capable of 
making almost any of the repairs needed on steam vessels short 
of complete breakdown of the larger shafts. In other words, we 
have at Honolulu not only a strong harbor, but all the other fea- 
tures which go to make up a desirable port of call, almost mid- 
way in the great ocean which separates our western shores from 
the Orient. 

While a recollection of the geometry we studied in our school 
days teaches us that a great circle on a sphere is the shortest dis- 
tance between any two points on its surface, experience in the 
Atlantic should teach us that this alone would not throw the 
steamer route in a given direction, and it is a well-known fact 
to all who have crossed the Pacific that the course now followed 
by steamers, even when they do not touch Honolulu, is by no 
means on the great-circle course which goes near Unalaska. The 
people who run the merchant-steamer lines are very practical, 
and when they take a given course it is because it means a .saving 
of money to the owners and in length of voyage to the passengers. 

On the more southerly route the weather is uniformly fine, and 
the Pacific deserves its name; but on the route which would be 
taken if ships went by way of Unalaska there is not only the 
difficulty of fog and ice, but terrific storms and dangerous rock 
shoals, which are entirely absent from tho more southerly route. 
It is very safe to say that the line of steamers which would under- 
take to make the voyage from San Francisco to Yokohama byway 
of Unalaska would very shortly surrender all its business to those 
who follow the more southerly routes. 

It thus seems to me very clear that the argument against the 



13 

annexation of Hawaii on the grounds that Unalaska would an- 
swer as an intermediate point of call instead of Honolulu is not 
only utterly untenable, but, in the light of all the facts of the case, 
simply ridiculous. 

As a matter of fact, the great circle track from San Francisco to 
Yokohama does not pass through Unalaska, but is 370 miles south 
of it. The distance between San Francisco and Yokohama on the 
great circleroute is something over 4,500 miles, but the majority of 
tonnage engaged in trans-Pacific navigation passes back and forth 
along tracks varying in length from about 4,800 to 5,500 miles. 

Hitherto, in considering the steamship routes between San 
Francisco and the Orient, Yokohama has always been the first 
port of call; but if we consider the possibility that the Philip- 
pines may become a part of our possessions, the route via Hono- 
lulu would be no farther from the great circle track than that via 
Unalaska, while, as has already been shown, the conditions are 
such as to make a northerly route not a matter for serious con- 
sideration. 

But we are told that in addition to "entangling alliances," to 
annex Hawaii is to strike a deathblow at the sugar-beet industry 
in this country. There is no State in the American Union more 
interested in that subject than is California. Her people are prac- 
tically unanimous for annexation, notwithstanding the repeated 
and constant declaration of injury to her beet-sugar industry. 
The legislature of California which elected Hon. Stephen M. 
White United States Senator in 1893 adopted the following reso- 
lutions: 

Chapter XL — Senate joint resolution No. 16, relative to annexation of 

Hawaiian Islands. 

[Adopted February 10, 1893.] 

Whereas a crisis has arisen in the affairs of the Hawaiian Government, and a 
desire has been expressed by a large number of the citizens of that Govern- 
ment that their country should be annexed to and become a part of the 
United States; and 

Whereas a delegation of citizens of the Hawaiian Government is now on 
its way to the national capital to secure such national legislation as will se- 
cure the result above suggested; and 

Whereas the interests of California and of our entire country would be 
enhanced by the annexation to our domain of the islands now comprised in 
the territory of the Hawaiian Kingdom: Therefore, 

Resolved by the senate of California, the assembly concurring, That when- 
ever the Hawaiian Government shall signify a desire that its territory should 
be annexed to and become a part of the territory of the United States, our 
Senators in Congress be instructed, and our Representatives be requested, 
3484 



14 

to use all honorable means at their disposal to bring about such a result upon 
such terms and conditions as may be most beneficial to the inhabitants of 
both countries; and further 

Be it resolved, That it is the sense of the people of the State of California that 
under no circumstances and under no conditions shall any power other than 
the United States of America ever be permitted to obtain any control or pro- 
tectorate over the islands comprising the territory of said Hawaiian Kingdom. 

Resolved, That the governor be requested to immediately telegraph these 
resolutions to our Senators and Representatives at Washington. 

The desire for annexation has greatly increased and is practi- 
cally unanimons now. 

The people of California know full well that there is not the 
slightest truth in the declaration, and hence have no fears in that 
direction. The islands produce cane sugar, not beet sugar. Add 
all the cane sugar which it is possible to produce in those islands 
to the product of the cane in Louisiana and elsewhere in the 
Union, and we must still import much cane sugar into the United 
States, for purposes for which beet sugar can not and will not be 
used, and of course there is not and can not be any competition 
between the cane sugar of the islands and the beet sugar of Cali- 
fornia. 

In round numbers the people of the United States consume an- 
nually 2,000,000 tons of sugar. The total product of this country 
is less than 336,000 tons. 

The highest importation of sugar from the islands was reached 
in 1897, and amounted to less than 200,000 tons, or 9 per cent of 
the total consumption in the United States. 

By the report of the Secretary of Agriculture it is shown that 
Hawaii has reached its maximum in the production of sugar, and 
taking into consideration the character of cultivation, the ex- 
haustion of the soil, and the cost of fertilizers in the islands, the 
Secretary concludes, and I think properly, that the production 
would decrease instead of increase. 

There must annually be produced over 1,500,000 tons of sugar 
in the United States before we can equal the consumption, with- 
out taking into consideration the increase of consumption. Sec- 
retary Wilson proceeds to show that the soil of this country is 
not exhausted by the sugar industry, and says: 

These considerations lead me to conclude that the system of agriculture 
pursued in Hawaii, which is certainly reducing the fertility of the soil, can 
not compete with a system of farm management in the United States, where 
the fertility of the soil is not at all reduced. 

3134 



15 

So I think I am amply justified in saying that the people of the 
Pacific coast have no reason to fear competition from the islands. 
But the Chinese and Japanese are held up as an all impending 
danger if we acquire the islands. "Why? Oh, because it is said 
the Chinese will literally overrun the country. Any one who will 
read the pending resolutions must know that this can not be so. 

The Chinese now upon the island are expressly prohibited from 
coming from there into this country by the provisions of the reso- 
lutions, and after annexation further Chinese immigration into 
these islands is also prohibited by existing law. But we are told 
that the Japanese will swarm in upon us if we take the islands. 
There is less than nothing in this proposition. All of the Japa- 
nese in the world can now come into the United States without 
the slightest obstruction, just as freely and as legally as the English, 
Germans, French, or anybody else, so that that scarecrow is 
lowered while the Stars and Stripes is being raised over Hawaii. 

Mr. Speaker, the milestone marking the close of the nine- 
teenth century finds America facing problems undreamt of when 
Washington penned his immortal address. We must advance. 
The commerce of the future demands way stations on its trans- 
portation lines. Before the commencement of the twentieth 
century let the flag of our country be waving over Hawaii in the 
Pacific and Puerto Rico in the Atlantic, and the two oceans becon- 
nected by the Nicaragua Canal, constructed, maintained, and 
operated under American ownership and American control. [Ap- 
plause.] 
3484 



LIBRARY OF CONGRESS 



019 944 318 5 



LIBRARY OF CONGRESS 



019 944 



I III HI IN I in 11 

318 5 fc 



Hollinger Corp. 
pH8.5 



LIBRARY OF CONGRESS 



019 944 318 5 • 



Hollinger Corp. 
pH8.5 






